How that mighty river of preferences will eventually flow is anyone’s guess.

In one bizarre scenario, Labor’s second candidate Vanessa Keenan is likely to only be elected if the Wagga Women’s Alliance (WWA), who Labor did a preference deal with, fails to get a candidate across the line.

This means the WWA’s entire vote will be redistributed and likely push Ms Keenan over the line.

In other words, Labor has urged supporters to give preferences to a group which, as fate now dictates, it has a vested interest in seeing fail.

In what type of perverted world could such a system exist?

Preferences create a type of electoral chaos theory where small events can have giant implications.

Consider highly popular and effective incumbents like Greg Conkey and Dallas Tout.

Both garnered strong primary votes but cruelled their chances by running as independents and are now battling for their political survival.

Their only mistake was to not be in on the rort.

It’s an undeniable fact that if you run on a ticket, your chances of being elected suddenly skyrocket.

It’s a system very few understand but one that clearly discourages independence and transparency.

You can’t blame candidates that chose to run on tickets; they’re simply playing the game as it’s laid out.

But the electorate, already deeply cynical about the political process, has no appetite for this smoke and mirrors approach to polling.

In an ideal world, elections would be free and fair.

Preferential voting prevents this from happening.

Democracy doesn’t need to be so complex.

Why can’t we have a system that everyone understands, a system where voters slot a “1” next to their preferred candidate and those with the most “1s” are elected.

After one of the most tumultuous terms in Wagga council’s history, we need stability.

We don’t need a voting system that encourages backroom deals and opaque outcomes.